Coalition

Cable’s punditry could come unstuck

“It’s not imminent. But you can see this happening.” So sayeth Vince Cable about the prospect of another global financial crisis, in interview with the New Statesman today. To be fair, you can see his point: there is a pervasive sense that the contradictions of the banking sector still haven’t been fixed, and — as I have written recently — our economy, and economies worldwide, are still afflicted by debt of all varieties. But that’s not going to calm those Tories who regard Cable as a combustive liability. In the weeks since the Lib Dems’  annihilation at the polls, the Business Secretary has increasingly reverted to his pre-coalition form: a

The Wei forward for the Big Society

The Big Society was dealt another blow with the resignation of Lord Wei yesterday. Sceptics will see this as a vindication of the concept’s problems. Most people, however, won’t notice that he has gone. The debate about the Big Society has long since become an elite sport, a jousting match between a determined promoter — the Prime Minister — and equally determined detractors in the media. Most people don’t care, and it won’t help or hurt the Tories at the next election. That’s a shame. For the Tories could use a positive post-Thatcher narrative about their administration. They may not need it if the country returns to economic growth. But

Cameron and Obama’s mutual appreciation has its limits

And the Word of the Day is “we”. Both David Cameron and Barack Obama deployed it liberally in their joint press conference just now, as they ran through all the mutual pleasantries and backslapping that attends these events. “We have discussed the two things we care about the most,” flushed Cameron, “getting our people jobs, and keeping our people safe.” From there on in it was first name terms — “thank you, David” — and claims about the strength of our two countries’ special, essential, unique relationship, etc. With the sun blazing down on the garden of Lancaster House, I’m sure the photos will turn out nice. Cameron appeared to

The state of the NHS

I know most CoffeeHousers aren’t particularly enamoured of paywalls, but the Times has given you a persuasive reason (£) to dive behind theirs today. (Or least to borrow a copy of the paper.) It’s the first of three reports by Camilla Cavendish on the NHS, this one concentrating on the Way Things Are Now. It is both a disheartening read and a powerful reminder of how taxpayers’ cash is being funnelled into a system that is dysfunctional in the extreme. Here is one snippet for your displeasure: “Care in Britain ranges from world-class to shocking. Between 1998 and 2006, 1.6 per cent of bowel cancer sufferers died within a month

A good time to go

Today is, as the saying has it, a good day to bury bad news. With President Obama on the ground and an ash cloud in the air, not much else is going to get a look in on the news’ bulletins. But it is worth noting that Nat Wei, the government’s big society advisor, has quit his role today having scaled back his involvement in February. Wei has been pretty detached from Downing Street for the last few months, his role rather usurped by Cameron’s big society ambassadors, Shaun Bailey and Charlotte Leslie. So his departure won’t make much difference to the government. But it is still rather embarrassing as

James Forsyth

Gove strikes to ease the removal of bad teachers

The quality of teaching in schools is one of the main determinants of how well a child does. But, shockingly, in almost half the local authorities in England a teacher hasn’t been sacked for being incompetent in the last five years. Retaining sub-standard teachers has harmed the life chances of goodness knows how many children. So the news that Michael Gove is now consulting on rules that will make it far easier to fire bad teachers is welcome. The Gove proposals give heads much more control and enable them to get rid of a poor teacher in a term; at the moment it takes at least a year and is

Cutting through the BS

If the Big Society were a horse, it would be shot. The wounds are too deep, the contamination too great, its legs are broken. And, worse, the Big Society is giving a good idea a bad name. David Cameron tried manfully today, but we only ever hear about the BS (as most Tory MPs call it) when he’s trying to relaunch it. No agenda can be sustained with such thin support. It has become hopelessly confused as an issue. Myths have crept in that volunteering relies on heavy state spending, so Cameron is talking out of his hat. It ain’t so — Jonathan Jones did the digging — but people

Going big on the Big Society

You certainly can’t fault David Cameron for his perseverance. Six years after pushing the thinking behind the Big Society in his pitch for the Tory leadership, and three relaunches of the idea later, he is still at it in a speech today. He will, apparently, stress that the Big Society is not some nebulous nothingness — but, rather, “as gritty and as important as it gets”. And as if to underline the point, the PM will announce some solid new measures to bolster his grand projet, such as £40 million of extra funding for volunteering. Cameron is, I suspect, making this case for two main reasons: to counter criticism of

Cameron should cleanse his Cabinet of the undead

Chris Huhne “cannot be sure” whether he might, after all, have been driving his car that fateful night. Ken Clarke cannot be sure why he spoke about rape in that way. Andrew Lansley cannot be sure. All this we learn from the Sunday newspapers: three ministers are for the chop — it’s just a matter of time. They will sit in the Cabinet death row alongside Caroline Spelman, unforgiven for her handling of the forests fiasco, and Vince Cable, caught on tape boasting about his “nuclear option” of resignation. This makes no fewer than five dead men walking — and that’s before you think about the party chairmanship. As I

Miliband’s “national mission” lacks a mission plan

I didn’t expect to be overwhelmed by Ed Miliband’s speech to the Progress Annual Conference today, but neither did I expect to be quite so underwhelmed. This was meant to be his Great Exposition of how, as he put it his introductory remarks, Labour “will win the next election”. But what we got was a straighforward list of some of the major themes of his leadership so far: the “squeezed middle,” the prospects for young people, community breakdown, and so on and so forth. These are all worthwhile areas for debate, but Miliband has dwelt on them before now, and more persuasively — such as in his speech to the

Cable’s latest warnings and provocations

My favourite part of the Guardian’s interview with Vince Cable today? When the business secretary says that his sermonic prescriptions from during the crash are of “enduring relevance” now. But there’s more to the article than self-aggrandisement, not least Cable’s gloomy overview of the British economy. It’s not quite the same as Alastair Darling’s Guardian interview in August 2008, but there is a touch of that here. “I think it is not understood that the British economy has declined by 6 or 7 per cent — it is now 10 per cent below trend,” says Cable, “Britain is no longer one of the world’s price setters. It is painful. It

Ken Bloke’s proposals are not so popular

What do the public think of Ken Clarke after his gaffe on Wednesday? According to a YouGov poll conducted during the 48 hours since his comments, a slim pluarlity think he should resign from his post as justice secretary: Perhaps unsurpisingly, the majority of Labour supporters agree with their leader’s call for him to go, although a majority of Tories and two-thirds of Lib Dems think he ought to stay. When it comes to the issue at the centre of the furore – reducing the sentence for someone who pleads guilty by up to half (as opposed to a third, as it stands now) – the public is much more

The World Service versus al-Jazeera

Yesterday’s debate on the future of the World Service was an unqualified success for its convener, Richard Ottaway. His motion received very extensive cross-party support and the MPs involved are confident of victory. As one source put it, “I haven’t met anyone – anyone – who agrees with that cut.” For its part, the government will “reflect carefully on the issue.” Parliament and Whitehall ring to anxious talk that cuts to the World Service will diminish Britain’s status abroad, and that less impartial state broadcasters, notably al-Jazeera, are capitalising on our withdrawal: al-Jazeera’s dominant coverage of the Arab Spring is a case in point. Ottaway said: “It is the cuts

No rights without responsibility

The most recent official statistics show that 5.4 million adults and 1.9 million children live in the UK’s 3.9 million workless households. Through the Universal Credit, the coalition is taking a radical approach to tackle this, but it won’t be enough. The government’s own analysis estimates that it will move 300,000 households into work. But this will leave 3.6 million households behind, dependent on benefits and likely to pass worklessness onto the next generation. There are also timing worries. Unemployment and, in particular, youth unemployment are high on the political agenda (new statistics on NEETs will come out next week), but the Universal Credit will not be fully implemented for

Miliband tries to explain himself

As the weekend drifts closer, there is a case that Ed Miliband has just enjoyed his best week as Labour leader. Not really from anything he has done — although his PMQs performance had more vigour than usual — but thanks to the backwash from the Ken Clarke calamity. MiliE’s spinners could barely have dreamed, even a few days ago, that their man would gain the the fiery approval of The Sun on matters of law and order. But that is effectively what they gained yesterday. “Labour is now tougher on crime,” bellowed the paper’s leader column, “than our Tory-led government.” Even today their editorial laments, “so much for David

Debt as a security concern

Is Britain’s growing national debt a matter of national security? In a speech this morning, Liam Fox said so. Sure, he said, you can protest at the defence cuts — but strength comes from having a strong economy and strong national accounts. “Those who are arguing for a fundamental reassessment of the Defence Review are really arguing for increased defence  pending. But they fail to spell out the  inevitable result — more borrowing, more tax rises, or more cuts elsewhere. The bottom line is that a strong economy is a national security requirement and an affordable Defence programme is the only responsible way to support our Armed Forces in the long term.” In

Freddy Gray

What has Ken done wrong?

What has Ken Clarke done wrong — other than commit the political sin of making a media gaffe? Nothing. In yesterday’s now infamous BBC interview, he was simply attempting to explain his position on rape sentencing, which may or may not be the right one. It’s a difficult question — and, under some antagonistic interrogation, he stumbled and got flustered. “Rape is rape,” said the radio interviewer. “Not it’s not,” the Justice Secretary replied. He later talked about “serious, proper rape.”   Bad phrasing? Certainly. Injudicious? Sure. But Clarke’s essential argument — that not all rapes are the same, that some rapes are worse than others — is quite obviously

Tory backbenchers oppose cuts to the World Service

There is a debate in the Commons this afternoon, urging the government to spare the BBC World Service from cuts. The resistance is being led by Richard Ottaway, chairman of the Foreign Affairs Select Committee and author of a report condemning the Foreign Secretary’s decision to cut funding for the service.   Ottaway is likely to be well supported, as the Tory right is exercised by the effect that cuts are having on Britain’s standing in the world. John Whittingdale is on side, and there were plenty of backbenchers (among them, David T.C. Davies and Sam Gyimah – and grandee Lord King) at a recent Westminster event who listened solemnly

Clegg adheres to the script on deficit reduction

What a curious speech by Nick Clegg to the CBI last night. Curious, not because it was bad — but because, in straining to give a uniquely “liberal” justification for deficit reduction and the spending cuts, the Deputy Prime Minister actually crafted an address that most Tory ministers should, and would, deliver themselves. Take his “liberal analysis” of the last decade: “On a liberal analysis, the last decade represented the worst of all worlds. On the one hand: unchecked private debt; an unsustainable housing market; an overleveraged banking sector; overreliance on City-based financial services while other regions and sectors suffered neglect. On the other: an inefficient state; central government wasting